Indin @ Moiddin Sayyad Ali Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 5196 Bom

     jdk                                                 1                                              9.crwp.2581.16.j.doc




                                                                                                                      
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                    CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2581 OF 2016




                                                                                              
    Indin @ Moiddin Sayyadali Shaikh                                                ]
    Age 53 years,                                                                   ]




                                                                                             
    Presently Lodged At- C/ 581                                                     ]
    Yerawada Open Dist. Prison,                                                     ]
    Class-I, Pune- 411006                                                           ] .. Petitioner

                        Vs.




                                                                         
    The State of Maharashtra                   ig                                   ].. Respondent


                                  ....
                                             
    Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate appointed for the Petitioner
    Mr. H.J. Dedia A.P.P. for the State
                                  ....
          


                                            CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND
                                                    MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

DATED : SEPTEMBER 06, 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT : [PER SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. ]:

1 Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent,

matter is taken up for final hearing. Heard both sides.

2 The petitioner preferred an application for parole on

2.7.2014 on the ground of illness of his wife. By order dated

9.12.2014, the said application came to be rejected by the

1 of 3

jdk 2 9.crwp.2581.16.j.doc

Divisional Commissioner, Pune. Being aggrieved thereby the

petitioner preferred an appeal on 29.12.2014. The said appeal

was allowed by order dated 17.10.2015. Pursuant to the said

order, the petitioner was released on parole for a period of

thirty days from 24.10.2015 to 23.11.2015. On 3.11.2015 the

petitioner preferred first application for extension of the parole.

The said application was granted and the parole period was

extended from 24.11.2015 to 23.12.2015.

3 On 7.12.2015 the petitioner preferred second

application for extension of parole for a period of thirty days.

The said application was rejected by order dated 26.4.2016

and hence, this petition.

4 The extension of parole was sought on the ground

that the wife of the petitioner required "Hysterectomy

Surgery". It is an admitted fact that the application for

extension was made within time. Genuineness of the reason

stated by the petitioner is not doubted and disputed.

Moreover, it is seen that as soon as the period of thirty days

was over, the petitioner surrendered back to the prison on his

2 of 3

jdk 3 9.crwp.2581.16.j.doc

own on 24.1.2016.

5 Looking to all the above facts, on humanitarian

ground we are inclined to extend the period of parole by a

period of thirty days from 24.12.2015 to 23.1.2016. Prison

punishment if any, imposed on the petitioner on account of his

overstay, is set aside. Rule is made absolute in above terms.

Office to communicate this order to the petitioner

who is in Yerawada Central Prison, Pune.

[ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.] [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. ]

kandarkar

3 of 3